Apple Sued For $2.7 Billion Over App Tracking Transparency Rules

A former UK competition official has filed a $2.7 billion lawsuit against Apple on behalf of app developers, alleging its App Tracking Transparency rules unfairly disadvantaged third-party apps while favoring Apple's own advertising ecosystem. Engadget reports: ATT debuted in 2021, ostensibly to give users more control over how much of their activity app developers can track across other apps and websites. The company told Reuters it was "bound by the exact same requirements as all developers."

However, regulators across Europe including in France, Italy and Poland have investigated ATT. Germany's competition regulator, the Federal Cartel Office, last month determined that Apple was favoring its own apps over those from external developers. It said the ATT pop-ups Apple used for its services "had the potential to encourage users to give their consent, whereas they had the potential to discourage consent for third-party apps."

As such, the company agreed to make some changes to how ATT works in the European Union. That follows the French Competition Authority fining Apple $175 million at current rates over ATT last year.

Re:

[sabbede]

I thought Germany got over its disdain for personal privacy after the wall fell. Guess I was wrong.

Apple has an advertising ecosystem?

[dgatwood]

Since when does Apple have an advertising ecosystem? I mean, I know there was that brief iAd disaster, but that's been dead for a decade now.

Is competing with the absence of something a problem from an antitrust perspective? If so, explain why, and how intrusive advertising benefits users, rather than app developers.

I'm with Apple on this one. Squarely.

Re:Apple has an advertising ecosystem?

[TigerPlish]

Been creeping in for a bit. First in news, then in the stock ticker, tv, music, books, and now maps.

All passed off as helpful "suggestions."

The ones that really torque me off are "suggestions" in books, tv and music. I've disabled what I can but some of this can't be turned off.

Apple makes enough with hardware alone. They don't need to whoreify the whole "ecosystem."

I let 'em know what I think of it, but that all goes to the bitbucket. No one gives a rip. 2.5 billion is not even a dime's worth of pocket change, to them.

I won't move to Android, because that's Alphabet, ergo 100x worse. So here we are. I feel like Dark Helmet. Surrounded by assholes. Greedy assholes.

At least, for now, apple ads aren't *bam* in your face like others - but a "sponsored" result is an ad by another name.

I"m starting to understand the desire, of some, to move out to the woods, in a cabin, sans grid.

Re:

[Luthair]

They've been running ads in the app store since 2016.

Re:

[dgatwood]

They've been running ads in the app store since 2016.

Well, yeah, but that's ads running in an entirely closed ecosystem. I guess in a silly way, you could argue that in-app ads with tracking disabled are less effective, and App Store ads provide another way to get eyes on apps, so it kind of competes, but that's like saying that Special Rollback Deal signs inside an individual Walmart store compete with Google AdSense. It's technically correct, but not particularly interesting.

Put another way, I can't imagine that any significant number of people who, prior

Re:

[Luthair]

Well, yeah, but that's ads running in an entirely closed ecosystem.

They're still tracking what users are using to sell to them.

Re:

[sabbede]

Hardly a surprise, that's essentially a retail outlet, and companies pay retailers to promote their products all the time. Ditto for the news app, a virtual newsstand, and the virtual music store that is iTunes.

But this is a story about tracking, not retail promotions.

Re:Apple has an advertising ecosystem?

[angel'o'sphere]

Android is so bad, you can type the exact name of an app into the "play store" and get two pages of "sponsored apps" before you see the App you are looking for.

So annoying ...

Re:

[dgatwood]

I don't know what identifiers Apple actually uses, but if there is any truth to that, then yeah, it's hypocritical.

It's also at least *mostly* academic. If Apple charges only for actual clicks, rather than impressions, then the cost to the advertiser is arguably the same whether the targeting is good or not. The only difference is the cost to Apple itself.

I would assume the main signal that Apple has is whether the user already has the app installed and/or has previously tried the app and deleted it. And while I understand why app developers would *like* to be able to know every app you have installed so that they ca

Re: Apple has an advertising ecosystem?

[SirSlud]

The better the tracking data, the more targeted the impression, the higher the clickthru rate. Crafting tracking consent dialogs in a way that favors one app or the other is going to increase the efficiency of campaign placements that target users of that app, rather than campaigns run by app developers who experience a lower percent of users consenting to track.

Re:

[angel'o'sphere]

Plenty of free Apps, form the App Store, have advertising in them.

Apple's privacy framework ;)

[Mirnotoriety]

Jan 1999: “You have zero privacy anyway — get over it [wired.com]”, Scott McNealy

In whose interest?

[shilly]

This suit makes clear that these guys, both the devs and the regulators, all focus on the interests of developers above the interests of consumers. I don’t want apps tracking me. I just don’t. These fuckers don’t want me to have a say in the matter. They can all fuck off.

Re:

[sabbede]

But it's so unfair to companies that want to abuse you! Don't you want them to be on a level playing field with companies that don't? Clearly, your priorities are wrong. These regulators are acting in your best interest, and you should let them keep doing a great job.

Oh not this clap-trap again

[mccalli]

This is years old. The third-party apps tracked people, so the consent pop-up appears. The first party apps do not track people, which is why they don't ask for permission to track. Because they don't.

Years and years of this nonsense.

Re:

[TEG24601]

Yet another reason why having old people in charge without anyone younger and/or technologically competent is very, very bad for consumers. The EU continually erodes digital privacy, and the US isn't much better.

Bull.

[sabbede]

I have an iPhone. I've seen the privacy prompts. This is a blatantly false claim. I don't see any difference in the "Allow, allow while open, deny" (or whatever the exact wording is) prompt for any application.

I thought the EU was against tracking, yet here they are trying to facilitate it by forcing Apple to weaken the anti-tracking protections.

Re:

[sg_oneill]

This is competition regulator stuff. The EU has lots of competing departments with different expectations. Privacy isn't regulated by competition regulators. But like most places, competition regulators kind of have sharp teeth.

Re:

[sabbede]

Stupid stuff is what this is. The argument is basically, "Apple discourages bad behavior by letting users block it, and that's unfair to companies that want to behave badly."

What about the GDPR?

[sabbede]

It looks to me like GDPR requires explicit consent for the kind of cross-app/company tracking that ATT requires explicit consent for. And is being sued over?